Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (2) TMI 245 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D on account of expenditure incurred for earning of tax exempt income - HELD THAT:- Assessee was possessed of sufficient own funds to meet the investment in question. No interest expenditure disallowance u/s 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the I.T. rules is attracted on this issue. Disallowance of administrative expenditure u/s 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D(2)(iii) - decisions of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of ‘Joint Investments Private Ltd vs CIT’ [2015 (3) TMI 155 - DELHI HIGH COURT] and ‘ACB India Limited vs ACIT’ [2015 (4) TMI 224 - DELHI HIGH COURT] wherein it is held that for computing the average value u/s 14A of the Act read with rule 8D(2)(iii), only the investment yielding non-taxable income have to be considered and not the entire investment. In view of this, the Assessing Officer is directed accordingly to consider only the investments yielding tax exempt income for computation of disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the I.T. Rules. Deduction u/s 80IC - 10% of the disallowance out of deduction claimed on the ground of utilization of expertise of management of non-eligible unit in the eligible units at Tahiwal (HP) - HELD THAT:- Issue to b decided in favour of assessee as relying on M/S CREMICA AGRO FOODS PVT. LTD. [2018 (1) TMI 842 - ITAT CHANDIGARH] MAT Computation u/s 115JB - Foreign exchange fluctuation loss addition - HELD THAT:- This issue is accordingly restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification of the aforesaid submissions of the assessee. If the assessee has offered the aforesaid amount for taxation in the return filed u/s 115JB of the Act in the subsequent assessment year 2010-11, then this amount should not be added / adjusted in computing the income of the assessee u/s 115JB for the year under consideration. This issue, with the above directions, is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer. . Claim of expenditure incurred on abundant project - assessee could not inadvertently make the aforesaid claim in the return of income, however, the plea for this claim was raised during the assessment proceedings - HELD THAT:- Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of "CIT vs. Pruthvi Brokers and Shareholders Pvt. Ltd." [2012 (7) TMI 158 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] has observed that the assessee is entitled to raise not merely additional legal submissions before the appellate authorities, but is also entitled to raise additional clams before them. The appellate authorities have jurisdiction to deal not merely with additional grounds, which became available on account of change of circumstances or law, but with additional grounds which were available when the return was filed. The words 'could not have been raised' must be construed liberally and not strictly. There may be several factors justifying the raising of a new plea in an appeal and each case must be considered on its own facts. In view of this, ground No.4 taken by the assessee is admitted for adjudication - issue is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for adjudication of the same on merits irrespective of the fact whether this claim was made in the return of income not. Addition u/s 43B - Delayed Contribution towards Provident Fund having been paid before the due date of filing of the return - HELD THAT:- As decided in M/S HEMLA EMBROIDERY MILLS (P) LTD. [2013 (2) TMI 41 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] it is an admitted fact that there was delay in depositing the employees' contribution of provident fund and ESIC. However, it is accepted by the AO that the deposit was made before filing of the return of income - the impugned disallowance is deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|